Business Capstone Case Study: The Glass Door Remains Closed

Business Capstonecase Study 2the Glass Door Remains Closed Another L

Business Capstonecase Study 2the Glass Door Remains Closed Another L

Analyze the factors influencing enrollment in undergraduate colleges and how these factors affect overall enrollment in business schools. Discuss the broader impacts of second-generation gender bias beyond school enrollment, particularly its influence on business and leadership in companies. Consider how the decline in female enrollment in business schools, despite overall college enrollment increases, could influence the future workforce and leadership landscape for women. Finally, evaluate the recommendations such as reducing tuition, maintaining small class sizes, and providing female students with mentorship opportunities. Compare these suggestions with other current research on second-generation gender bias, highlighting similarities and differences in proposed solutions to improve gender equity in business education and leadership.

Paper For Above instruction

The landscape of higher education enrollment and its influence on business schools is shaped by a myriad of factors, including societal, economic, cultural, and institutional elements. Understanding these factors is critical for addressing disparities and fostering inclusive environments. Several key influences dictate college enrollment trends, including socioeconomic status, cultural expectations, perceptions of institutional prestige, and the perceived return on investment associated with specific fields of study (Barnett & Coate, 2010). For business schools, perceptions about gender roles and career prospects significantly impact female enrollment, often leading to underrepresentation despite overall increases in college participation (Blickenstaff, 2005).

Socioeconomic factors play a vital role in enrollment decisions, as families with higher financial means often have more access to higher education opportunities and can afford to invest in a college degree. Cultural expectations can also influence whether women are encouraged or discouraged from pursuing leadership-oriented fields like business. Additionally, institutional branding and the visibility of successful female role models contribute to shaping female students' aspirations (Carnes & Mayo, 2014). These influences collectively impact enrollment patterns, and when particular fields like business become perceived as male-dominated, female students may self-select out, perpetuating gender disparities (Gore & Singh, 2013).

Beyond the immediate scope of educational settings, second-generation gender bias has profound implications for business and corporate leadership. ‘Second generation gender bias’ encompasses subtle, systemic barriers that reinforce gender stereotypes, often embedded within organizational policies and cultures (Eagly & Carli, 2007). Such biases manifest in practices like gendered expectations, biases in performance evaluations, and limited access to mentorship, which collectively hinder women's advancement into leadership roles. These biases not only restrict individual career growth but also diminish the diversity of thought and innovation within organizations (Catalyst, 2011).

In the corporate world, these biases contribute to a leadership pipeline that favors male candidates, reducing opportunities for women to ascend to executive roles. Studies reveal that even when women possess comparable qualifications, they face barriers such as exclusion from informal networks and biases in decision-making processes (Ibarra, Carter, & Silva, 2010). This perpetuates a cycle where gender inequality persists, affecting organizational effectiveness and the broader economy. Additionally, the societal perception of leadership as a male domain reinforces stereotypes, further entrenching biases in corporate culture (Eagly & Karau, 2002).

The decline in women’s enrollment in business schools, despite rising overall college attendance, portends significant consequences for the future workforce and corporate leadership. This trend risks creating a leadership gap filled predominantly by men, thereby limiting gender diversity at the highest organizational levels (Smith et al., 2019). Such imbalance not only affects organizational innovation and decision-making but also perpetuates stereotypes that women are less suited for leadership roles. Moreover, the underrepresentation of women in business education hampers efforts to normalize female leadership, potentially leading to a less inclusive and equitable workforce (Kamenidou et al., 2020).

To counter these trends, scholars and practitioners recommend targeted interventions. One approach focuses on making educational environments more accommodating for women through affordable tuition, smaller class sizes, and facilitation of interactions with successful female mentors and role models (Hansman & Hunt, 2014). These strategies aim to address immediate barriers and foster a sense of belonging among female students. Such measures resonate with broader research suggesting the importance of representation and accessible support systems in overcoming gender biases (Oostrom et al., 2019).

This recommended approach shares similarities with other research advocating for mentorship programs, inclusive curriculum design, and institutional policies that promote gender equity (Ely, Iida, & Kolb, 2011). For instance, studies emphasize role models' influence on women’s career aspirations and confidence (Osborne & Plastrik, 2018). However, differences arise in the scope and emphasis of interventions. While some research prioritizes structural reforms and policy changes within organizational frameworks (Hoobler & Hu, 2013), others focus more intensely on individual-level support and community-building initiatives (Kay & Jaskiewicz, 2011). The discussed recommendations align more with the latter, emphasizing incremental, tangible improvements at the classroom and mentorship levels rather than broad systemic overhaul.

In conclusion, addressing gender disparities in undergraduate business education necessitates a comprehensive understanding of the factors influencing enrollment, systemic biases affecting careers, and targeted interventions. Efforts such as reducing financial barriers and fostering mentorship opportunities are essential but should be complemented by broader institutional and societal reforms. By implementing a multifaceted approach, academia and industry can work together to promote gender equity, ensuring that future business leaders reflect diverse perspectives and experiences, thereby enriching organizational effectiveness and societal progress.

References

  • Barnett, R. C., & Coate, K. (2010). Engaging universities: An essential element in widening participation. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 34(4), 419-433.
  • Blickenstaff, J. C. (2005). Gender and science majors: A review of the evidence. Science Education, 89(4), 377-406.
  • Carnes, M., & Mayo, R. (2014). Women’s leadership development: Facilitating female students’ awareness and agency. Journal of Leadership Education, 13(1), 70-80.
  • Catalyst. (2011). Women corporate directors and executive officers: What directors think about women in leadership. Catalyst Report.
  • Eagly, A. H., & Carli, L. L. (2007). Through the Labyrinth: The Truth About How Women Become Leaders. Harvard Business Review Press.
  • Eagly, A. H., & Karau, S. J. (2002). Role congruity theory of prejudice toward female leaders. Psychological Review, 109(3), 573-598.
  • Gore, P. A., & Singh, S. (2013). Understanding gender inequality in higher education. Journal of Higher Education, 84(6), 829-854.
  • Hansman, C., & Hunt, S. (2014). Education and mentorships for women in business leadership. International Journal of Education Management, 28(6), 601-610.
  • Ibarra, H., Carter, N. M., & Silva, C. (2010). Why men still get more promotions than women. Harvard Business Review, 88(9), 80-85.
  • Kamenidou, I., Sampani, E., & Tsiligiris, V. (2020). Gender diversity in management: The business case for women in leadership. Journal of Business Research, 122, 648-662.
  • Kay, R., & Jaskiewicz, P. (2011). Mentor relationships and women’s career advancement. Journal of Management, 37(4), 1138-1160.
  • Oostrom, J. K., Van Dijke, M., & De Cremer, D. (2019). Social support moderates the impact of stereotype threat on women’s leadership ambition. Journal of Applied Psychology, 104(4), 429-441.
  • Osborne, T., & Plastrik, P. (2018). Representation and mentorship in women’s career development. Career Development International, 23(2), 150-171.
  • Smith, K. L., Johnson, T. R., & Williams, M. (2019). Women’s underrepresentation in business leadership: Causes and solutions. Journal of Business Ethics, 155(2), 385-399.

Related Assignments